Discussion:
Repeal the Children's Television Act of 1990 (BRAND NEW FACEBOOK PAGE)
(too old to reply)
TMC
2012-04-04 07:13:06 UTC
Permalink
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966

About:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966?sk=info

Description
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=209411.10

Re: NBC To Debut Saturday Preschool Block
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM »
Quote from: Mario-500 on March 29, 2012, 07:02:12 AM
The description "preschool block" reminds me of my wish for the repeal
of the Children's Television Act passed by the Congress of the United
States in 1990. If more folks were aware of the law and they were to
contact their legislators, there would be a great chance of this law
being repealed, thus leaving broadcasters without obligations to
broadcasting educational and informative programming programming. It
may not lead to the return of the traditional Saturday morning
programming of the past immediately, but it would mean less government
regulation of content broadcast.

There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.

In any event, even if it were repealed, the chances of it resulting in
the "return of the traditional Saturday morning programming" is
somewhere in the general vicinity of zero. Saturday morning cartoons
did not disappear because of the Children's Television Act -- they
disappeared because children's advertising mostly moved to cable
channels. The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to
continue running kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which
was more profitable) and the weak stations started running
infomercials. The only way that changes is if stations think that they
can sell advertising during children's programming.

« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.

Apparently, broadcasters seem to be apathetic about the issue as well
-- even though they're finding the cheapest ways to satisfy E/I,
they're in no hurry to get their lobbying group in Washington to
pressure the congresspeople to abolish E/I.

Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.

Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.

« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM »
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.

Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.

The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.

« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2012, 09:29:58 PM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.

Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.

The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.

Nickelodeon and CN don't show blatantly educational programming other
than possibly Nick News (wasn't that sydicated to local station as an
E/I show), school age kids won't watch them. Kids that actually want
to watch educational shows watch PBS

« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 12:49:37 AM »
If Saved by the Bell qualifies as E/I then whay can't Looney Tunes,
Tom & Jerry, or even the Three Stooges?

But I agree that even if E/I is repealed, the networks will never go
back to Saturday morning kid's shows like they used to be, and will
probably be more likely to drop them completely.

The best thing that I can see coming out of E/I being repealed is that
perhaps college football and basketball will start earlier in the
day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/I
Matt Casey
2012-04-05 18:04:58 UTC
Permalink
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260...
About:http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260...
Descriptionhttp://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=209411.10
Re: NBC To Debut Saturday Preschool Block
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM »
Quote from: Mario-500 on March 29, 2012, 07:02:12 AM
The description "preschool block" reminds me of my wish for the repeal
of the Children's Television Act passed by the Congress of the United
States in 1990. If more folks were aware of the law and they were to
contact their legislators, there would be a great chance of this law
being repealed, thus leaving broadcasters without obligations to
broadcasting educational and informative programming programming. It
may not lead to the return of the traditional Saturday morning
programming of the past immediately, but it would mean less government
regulation of content broadcast.
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
In any event, even if it were repealed, the chances of it resulting in
the "return of the traditional Saturday morning programming" is
somewhere in the general vicinity of zero. Saturday morning cartoons
did not disappear because of the Children's Television Act -- they
disappeared because children's advertising mostly moved to cable
channels. The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to
continue running kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which
was more profitable) and the weak stations started running
infomercials. The only way that changes is if stations think that they
can sell advertising during children's programming.
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
Apparently, broadcasters seem to be apathetic about the issue as well
-- even though they're finding the cheapest ways to satisfy E/I,
they're in no hurry to get their lobbying group in Washington to
pressure the congresspeople to abolish E/I.
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM »
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2012, 09:29:58 PM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
Nickelodeon and CN don't show blatantly educational programming other
than possibly Nick News (wasn't that sydicated to local station as an
E/I show), school age kids won't watch them. Kids that actually want
to watch educational shows watch PBS
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 12:49:37 AM »
If Saved by the Bell qualifies as E/I then whay can't Looney Tunes,
Tom & Jerry, or even the Three Stooges?
But I agree that even if E/I is repealed, the networks will never go
back to Saturday morning kid's shows like they used to be, and will
probably be more likely to drop them completely.
The best thing that I can see coming out of E/I being repealed is that
perhaps college football and basketball will start earlier in the
day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/I
The Children's Television Act should not be repealed as it helps
maintain the appropriate use of the public airwaves, prevents the
networks from producing programming that's inappropriate, helps
parents guide their children in what TV programs they should watch,
promotes family-friendly programming, takes the burden off PBS, and
prevents the exclusion of children from TV programming. E/I isn't
censorship. Do we want our children to watch filth or be excluded from
TV programming because everything is for adults.

There is plenty of programming for adults and that's on the
majority of the time. Why can't some time, even if its only for one
hour a week, be reserved for our kids? And when they watch, why can't
they learn something? There's needs to be more available for kids to
watch on television than just cartoons. And I wouldn't want my kids to
watch today's cartoons anyway. They're low quality garbage. It would
actually be censorship to repeal E/I because it would be allowing the
corrupt elements of the entertainment industry to control the
airwaves. Repealing E/I could actually lead to the imposition of
unconstitutional regulations. Do you all want that?

I agree that not everything should be family-friendly and for
children. Adults should have entertainment, but the networks giving
children three hours of their programming time every week isn't making
that much of a sacrifice and guarantees continued freedom of the
airwaves. If you hurt our kids by denying them that three hours that's
currently devoted to them you'll hurt us all. I'll say it again. The
networks devote the majority of their time to adults, but they can
give children three hours a week so children can learn.
Remysun
2012-04-13 03:11:34 UTC
Permalink
     The Children's Television Act should not be repealed as it helps
maintain the appropriate use of the public airwaves, prevents the
networks from producing programming that's inappropriate, helps
parents guide their children in what TV programs they should watch,
promotes family-friendly programming, takes the burden off PBS, and
prevents the exclusion of children from TV programming. E/I isn't
censorship. Do we want our children to watch filth or be excluded from
TV programming because everything is for adults.
It needs to be reformed or rolled back to pre-1990 standards. Back
then, there were adaptations of Huck Finn and other childrens' books,
lessons on parts of speech, science experiments, safety tips, and be
nice to others messages. Now, everything is zoo shows and Disney
skirting the E/I because everything they produce is vertical
integration. Kids learned jack shit from Hannah Montana, but it sure
helped sell a lot of stuff.

Seriously, Pokemon may be a blatant commercial, but subtly, there's
649 of them, individually named with allusions and puns, and there's
kids who've memorized all of them, which proves that they could learn
if education wasn't such a crock.
     There is plenty of programming for adults and that's on the
majority of the time. Why can't some time, even if its only for one
hour a week, be reserved for our kids? And when they watch, why can't
they learn something? There's needs to be more available for kids to
watch on television than just cartoons. And I wouldn't want my kids to
watch today's cartoons anyway. They're low quality garbage. It would
actually be censorship to repeal E/I because it would be allowing the
corrupt elements of the entertainment industry to control the
airwaves. Repealing E/I could actually lead to the imposition of
unconstitutional regulations. Do you all want that?
If that's what they had before, then yes. Weekday afternoons and
Saturday mornings used to belong to kids. Now, everything has been
reduced to the 3 hours needed to comply with the law, and the
diversity (which is the greatest lesson we can pass onto children) has
been nearly eliminated, save for Dora's once a week appearance on CBS.

And the worst part is that it doesn't address the needs of children at
their various stages of development. It would actually be better to
have the old cartoons back on TV, because parents might actually watch
with their children out of nostalgia, and that togetherness is what's
missing from society.

So I know what you're saying, but the three hours is very limiting,
because it's not enough.
Ken Arromdee
2012-04-23 22:33:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Remysun
Seriously, Pokemon may be a blatant commercial, but subtly, there's
649 of them, individually named with allusions and puns, and there's
kids who've memorized all of them, which proves that they could learn
if education wasn't such a crock.
This argument always bothered me. How do you know that the kids memorized
all the Pokemon? Maybe they memorized 2/3 of them, forgot some more,
and got 10% of them wrong. Maybe they just know the names but got the
descriptions wrong. After all, how would you ever notice?
--
Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee

Obi-wan Kenobi: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes."
Yoda: "Do or do not. There is no 'try'."
Remysun
2012-04-24 02:34:19 UTC
Permalink
This argument always bothered me.  How do you know that the kids memorized
all the Pokemon?  Maybe they memorized 2/3 of them, forgot some more,
and got 10% of them wrong.  Maybe they just know the names but got the
descriptions wrong.  After all, how would you ever notice?
For the original 150, there was a Pokerap. The video and card games
depend on taking advantage of Pokemon strengths and weaknesses. Plus,
both versions depend on reading. The card game is their first dabble
in fine print. I'm actually surprised that the Christian Right hasn't
yet denounced Pokemon over their version of evolution.

But really, even if they err as much as you claim, that would still be
a sad improvement if it could somehow be applied to standardized
tests. Like when I had to memorize the periodic table.
Ken Arromdee
2012-04-24 19:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Remysun
This argument always bothered me.  How do you know that the kids memorized
all the Pokemon?
For the original 150, there was a Pokerap. The video and card games
depend on taking advantage of Pokemon strengths and weaknesses.
Taking advantage of Pokemon strengths and weaknesses helps you play the
game better, but you need to memorize very few Pokemon in order to just
play and even win. You certainly don't need to memorize even half of them.
You can't even get all the Pokemon in a single game.
Post by Remysun
Plus, both versions depend on reading.
Reading is not memorization.
--
Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee

Obi-wan Kenobi: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes."
Yoda: "Do or do not. There is no 'try'."
r***@yahoo.com
2012-11-22 00:48:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matt Casey
The Children's Television Act should not be repealed as it helps
maintain the appropriate use of the public airwaves, prevents the
networks from producing programming that's inappropriate, helps
parents guide their children in what TV programs they should watch,
promotes family-friendly programming, takes the burden off PBS, and
prevents the exclusion of children from TV programming. E/I isn't
censorship. Do we want our children to watch filth or be excluded from
TV programming because everything is for adults.
idiot. Because of the children's television act, they are already being excluded from tv programming because everything is for adults or preschoolers. Those are the only two choices people without cable tv or satellite tv because they (specifically their parents) can't afford it and have to rely on over the air tv have.

It used to be that kids who had to rely on over the air tv had lots of programming for them on Saturday mornings and weekdays.

Then because of the new rules of the CTA, that dwindled to zero leaving only preschooler shows and adult shows.

Yes, Fox and WB had plenty of kids'progrrams after the CTA of 1990 passed. However, that was BEFORE the required mandatory three hours of so-called "educational" tv shows designed for preschoolers per week.

Nothing left for school-age kids.


and Plenty of other studies have shown and stated that preschoolers should NOT be watching tv.
Post by Matt Casey
There is plenty of programming for adults and that's on the
majority of the time. Why can't some time, even if its only for one
hour a week, be reserved for our kids? And when they watch, why can't
they learn something? There's needs to be more available for kids to
watch on television than just cartoons. And I wouldn't want my kids to
watch today's cartoons anyway. They're low quality garbage. It would
actually be censorship to repeal E/I because it would be allowing the
corrupt elements of the entertainment industry to control the
airwaves. Repealing E/I could actually lead to the imposition of
unconstitutional regulations. Do you all want that?
I agree that not everything should be family-friendly and for
children. Adults should have entertainment, but the networks giving
children three hours of their programming time every week isn't making
that much of a sacrifice and guarantees continued freedom of the
airwaves. If you hurt our kids by denying them that three hours that's
currently devoted to them you'll hurt us all. I'll say it again. The
networks devote the majority of their time to adults, but they can
give children three hours a week so children can learn.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...